Results for "energy supplier"

MADISON, CONN. September 12, 2018 – Ad watchdog truthinadvertising.org (TINA.org) has filed a deceptive advertising complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Texas Attorney General against Stream Gas & Electric, Ltd., a Texas-based energy reseller and multi-level marketing company. TINA.org investigated Stream and found that the company and its distributors are engaged in a deceptive

July 2018: A state court judge granted final approval of the settlement agreement. February 2018: A state court judge preliminarily approved a settlement agreement. According to the terms, class members who were rolled off of Ambit’s Guaranteed Savings Plan to its New York Select Variable Plan may receive a refund in an amount that depends

June 2018: A federal judge granted final approval of the settlement. February 2018: A federal judge preliminarily approved a settlement agreement. According to its terms, class members may receive either a cash payment (in an amount that depends on the amount of energy they used) or an $8.50 credit to use on up to 12

June 2019: This case was transferred from a court in Illinois to another in New Jersey where a similar case (Rolland v. Spark Energy) is pending. (Case No. 19-cv-14114, D. NJ.) March 2019: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Spark Energy for allegedly using a bait-and-switch marketing scheme in which it lures consumers to switch

May 2019: This case was transferred to another court in Illinois. (Case No. 19-cv-3128, C. D. IL.) October 2018: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Sperian Energy for allegedly deceptively using a bait-and-switch scheme to deceive consumers. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the company lures consumers to switch electricity suppliers by offering low teaser rates

In April 2019, a class-action lawsuit was filed against the electricity supplier Verde Energy for allegedly misleadingly offering “low cost” and “competitive” rates when, according to plaintiffs, the variable rates charged by the electricity supplier after the initial teaser rate expires are not tied to the market price and it routinely charges up to three

In March 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Direct Energy Services, LLC for allegedly deceptively advertising low, temporary fixed rates without adequately disclosing its variable rate pricing structure. According to the complaint, Direct Energy customers often pay more for energy than they would have if they stayed with their traditional energy supplier. (Plaintiffs filed

November 2016: This case was voluntarily dismissed , the reasons for which have not been disclosed. April 2016: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Direct Energy for allegedly deceptively luring consumers to switch to them as their energy supplier by falsely promising consumers lower electricity bills. According to the complaint, the named plaintiff paid 5.84

In January 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed alleging that Verde Energy falsely represents that it offers variable energy rates based on market conditions when, according to plaintiffs, the energy company routinely charges almost four times the market rate. (Marshall et al v. Verde Energy USA, Inc., Case No. 18-cv-1244, D. NJ.) For more of

September 2018: A federal judge granted final approval of the settlement agreement. May 2018: A federal judge granted preliminary approval of the settlement agreement. A final fairness hearing is scheduled for September 28, 2018. For more information, go to http://www.settlementstreampa.com/. December 2017: Plaintiffs moved for preliminary approval of a proposed settlement agreement. According to its

July 2018: This case was transferred from a court in the eastern district of Pennsylvnia to one in the western district of Pennsylvania. (Corsale et al v. Sperian Energy Corp., Case No. 18-cv-996, W. D. PA.) May 2018: A class-action lawsuit was filed against the electricity supplier Sperian Energy for allegedly falsely offering low initial

In May 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Sperian Energy for allegedly misleadingly offering a low teaser rate followed by a month-to-month variable rate that is based on the market when, according to the plaintiffs, the electricity supplier charges high rates that are not based on the market and consumers end up paying more

In May 2018, a false advertising class-action lawsuit against Xoom Energy was transferred to federal court. The complaint, which was originally filed in state court in April 2018, alleges that the company misleadingly promises consumers that if they switch to Xoom Energy, they will save on their monthly bill by getting the offered introductory teaser

In September 2013, a federal judge approved a $14.3 million settlement to a class-action lawsuit consumers filed against Energy Plus Holdings, an electricity supplier in New York, in 2011. The plaintiffs alleged that Energy Plus marketed its electricity service by claiming consumers would get “rewards,” such as points for airfare and hotels or cash back,

June 2017: The appeal was withdrawn, the reasons for which have not been disclosed. April 2017: The named plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal regarding the August 2015 dismissal order, the March 2017 summary judgment order, and the judgment in favor of the company. (Case No. 17-1003, 2nd Cir.) March 2017: A federal judge granted

March 2018: After the parties notified the court that they reached a settlement agreement, this case was voluntarily dismissed as to the named plaintiff and as to the putative class members. The terms of the settlement agreement were not disclosed. September 2014: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Smart One Energy, LLC for allegedly using

February 2018: A federal judge granted preliminary approval of a settlement agreement. According to the terms, class members will receive a partial refund for the amount they paid while on a variable plan. Class members who were enrolled in a variable plan between January 2011 and January 2014 will receive a 15% refund and class

In March 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Verde Energy USA for allegedly luring customers to switch energy suppliers by falsely promising low teaser rates followed by variable rates that are based on market conditions when, according to the complaint, the variable rate is not based on market conditions and is inflated. (Mercado et

In March 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Agway Energy Services for allegedly deceptively luring consumers to switch energy suppliers by promising them low teaser rates followed by variable rates based on market-related factors when, according to the plaintiffs, the rates charged after the teaser rate are inflated and not based on market-related factors.